Answer:
aviolence is an acceptable
Answer:
The phrase which best describes the context of a speech is:
C. the energy in the auditorium.
Explanation:
The other options refer more to the speech itself than to the context in which it is given. However, the energy in the auditorium or, in other words, the audience's attitude is deeply connected to the speech's context. No matter how much the speaker has prepared - how he has chosen to phrase his ideas, how he divided the speech into sections, which facts he has chosen to present -, the way the audience behaves and reacts to the speech, or even the audience's attitude before the speech starts - are they restless? hungry? relaxed? - all have the ability the impact the speech and how successful it is.
Elie Wiesel's literary work prompted one reviewer to recall Isaac Bashevis Singer's definition of Jews as "a people who can't sleep themselves and let nobody else sleep," and to predict, "While Elie Wiesel lives and writes, there will be no rest for the wicked, the uncaring or anyone else." [1<span>] If uneasiness is the result of Wiesel's work, it is not a totally unintended result. Since the publication of </span>Night<span> in 1958, Wiesel, a Jewish survivor of the Nazi death camps, has borne a persistent, excruciating literary witness to the Holocaust. His works of fiction and non-fiction, his speeches and stories have each had the same intent: to hold the conscience of Jew and non-Jew (and, he would say, even the conscience of God) in a relentless focus on the horror of the Holocaust and to make this, the worst of all evils, impossible to forget.</span>
Wiesel refuses to allow himself or his readers to forget the Holocaust because, as a survivor, he has assumed the role of messenger. It is his duty to witness as a "messenger of the dead among the living," [2] and to prevent the evil of the victims' destruction from being increased by being forgotten. But he does not continue to retell the tales of the dead only to make life miserable for the living, or even to insure that such an atrocity will not happen again. Rather, Elie Wiesel is motivated by a need to wrestle theologically with the Holocaust.
The grim reality of the annihilation of six million Jews presents a seemingly insurmountable obstacle to further theological thought: how is it possible to believe in God after what happened? The sum of Wiesel's work is a passionate effort to break through this barrier to new understanding and faith. It is to his credit that he is unwilling to retreat into easy atheism, just as he refuses to bury his head in the sand of optimistic faith. What Wiesel calls for is a fierce, defiant struggle with the Holocaust, and his work tackles a harder question: how is it possible not to believe in God after what happened? [3]
Not 100 percent sure but i think it is <span>b.they represent something great</span>
